Why not move to Cuba or France if you want socialism?

[tooAlive]

I do not care for the Cuban dictatorship, but I do not think it is any worse than a number of dictatorships the United States supported during the Cold War. In Cuba there is universal health care and free public education all the way to the doctorate level. The standard of living in Cuba compares favorably with the standard of living elsewhere in Latin America, and that is the relevant comparison.

The relevant comparison with the United States is the countries of Scandinavia. As I pointed in many respects those countries out perform the United States.

Really, so tell me Vern, why are cubans willing to risk their lives in the Florida straits by leaving the island on anything that floats?

.[/QUOT
Some Cubans, not the majority. And, what do you know about those who do?

I have family in Cuba.

And pretty much the general consensus among most people living there is the desire to get out. Saying that "some" Cubans risk their lives to reach the Florida Keys is a ridiculous understatement.

It doesn't seem to me like you've actually been to Cuba.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Lincoln sucks.

And yet he is revered and honored by all but the most extreme Americans. Are you aware of how despicable most Americans will find your post? Or, are you so desperate for attention you don't care?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Really, so tell me Vern, why are cubans willing to risk their lives in the Florida straits by leaving the island on anything that floats?

.[/QUOT
Some Cubans, not the majority. And, what do you know about those who do?

I have family in Cuba.

And pretty much the general consensus among most people living there is the desire to get out. Saying that "some" Cubans risk their lives to reach the Florida Keys is a ridiculous understatement.

It doesn't seem to me like you've actually been to Cuba.

No, I have not. My nieces have and both give a different perspective on those they met then you state your relatives provided you. In any case, the sample size for both of our opinions is small.

 

[BlindBoo]

Lincoln sucks.

And a Communist too?

Bet he was into witchcraft as well!!!!!

 

[LibertyLemming]

Lincoln sucks.

And yet he is revered and honored by all but the most extreme Americans. Are you aware of how despicable most Americans will find your post? Or, are you so desperate for attention you don't care?

I don't care if the masses think killing 600,000+ people to reinforce government power over citizens is a good idea. I also don't care if the masses want to support someone who suspended Habeas Corpus rights.

I am not the least bit shocked that the same people who vote for R and D over and over and over despite the almost constant decline of the country think Lincoln was a great president.

Here:

Lincolns administration was so corrupt that Lincoln personally accepted bribes that resulted in the release of thousands of Confederate pow's including many of their best trained soldiers.

In 1862, Lincoln threatened the South to rejoin the Union or he would free their slaves. This both confirmed the Souths belief about Lincoln and caused all efforts at political resolution to cease as Lincoln cut off Alexander Stephens (the Confederate VP) who had been working tirelessly trying to win over support to end the war in the South... and he had been succeeding until this point. It was only after the South rebuffed Lincoln that he would announce his Emancipation Proclamation which had no effect in the South where slaves didn't learn they were free. But it did serve to turn the five slave states in the Union into Southern sympathizers leading Lincoln to paranoia where he began authorizing the arrest of Northerners and looking away as thousands of abuses against civilians began to take place drawing condemnation against him actually fueling hatred for him among people who supported him.

Black soldiers are now being promoted for their efforts in the Union army claiming they were among the best and the bravest... a rewriting of history which proves completely false. Black soldiers had little training, little survival skills and often their own guns would explode in their faces or they would panic forgetting how to load them because they weren't even taught how to properly care for their weapons let alone often being given weapons which had been deemed unfit for combat... they could even be shot by their own white contemporaries in the Union army.

Lincoln's battle plan was a war of attrition, a war to eliminate the Souths resources knowing he had both superior manpower and industrial power. However, most of the South was rural where they not only lived off the land and provided a better breed of soldier, they were dirt poor and knew how to turn the very land to their advantage being able to create their own gunpowder, their own clothes, to survive long periods with barely anything to eat and to work with their hands whereas many Union soldiers were urban, had never even held a gun let alone fire one, their only hunting experience was often as sportsmen and living off the land was going to the local store to buy what they needed. Many in the North hated Lincoln for that fact alone as rather than taking the time to properly train his soldiers, Lincoln sent them into a meat grinder often with no more ability to fight that when they were back home. The reason he finally turned Sherman and Grant loose against Southern civilian targets we are told was to cut off Confederate supplies... yet, most of these targets couldn't even provide for their own needs as what Lincoln was allowing to happen was a war against civilian targets designed to break the Confederate army forcing it's soldiers to return home to protect their families. The hatred towards the North by Southerners after the war was based on this view which is only a partial truth as at this time Lincoln had finally accepted he could not command the war and turned the war effort over to Grant and Sherman who wanted to end the war as quickly as possible and this was the only real means to accomplish that.

Another reason Lincoln was such a poor leader was he was bought off by corporate America. As President, not only did northern industry profit from the war, they fought for and gained greater control over all manufactured output and raw materials which formerly had been the basis for countless small family owned businesses. Lincolns economic policies would not be seen for the disaster that they were because they were masked by the cost of fighting the US Civil War. But it was an economic boom for big business owners forcing most smaller businesses out of business in many big US cities. After the war, the federal government continued to back America's industrial leaders financially leading to a backlash which the Democrats used to their advantage and established decades of mismanagement where the federal government refused to get involved in private enterprise. This allowed greed to blind people looking for huge profits where they were often wealthy one day and committing suicide the next having lost everything. This in turn greatly expanded the already existing failure of the industrial North and Wall Street leading to even greater financial crisis. Millions of Americans would suffer and die with the US government going deeper and deeper into debt as it consistently was forced to deal with the consequences of their inaction even as they refused to address the causation for these financial disasters. Then came the stock market crash of 1929 bringing on the Great Depression and regulations meant to prevent another such economic collapse... again, all being set in motion by Lincoln as until the time of Lincoln, the economic chaos in the North could still be reasoned with as exploiting Southern agriculture and the fact that most Americans did not invest their money in speculation. This both provided resources to overcome collapse and and limited damage as those not investing in speculation / stocks were self sufficient even if they did not gain wealth.

All of our current financial collapse and corporate control over American leaders became greatly accelerated by the corruption of Lincolns administration which was unparalleled in US history up to that point and for almost a century after being surpassed only by Grant and even that was due to the fact that the people behind Lincoln controlling him also were behind Grant controlling him as well.

The National Union Party was formed to help Lincoln win re election because his own party turned on him and there were few cities in the North who wanted Lincoln re elected. This is a fact I have addressed many times but which she expanded upon mentioning that Lincoln was paranoid about assassination... by Northerners who supported the Union war effort. They saw Lincoln as the reason they suffered the loss of so many of their young men and viewed a Lincoln re election as guaranteeing defeat because the majority of Northern voters were now willing to allow the South to secede and were beginning to look at the Confederacys leaders as being more in the right since all of their claims about corruption and abuse of power had now been proven absolutely true. This in turn explains why after the war both Stephens and Jefferson Davis were beloved in the North even by Union supporters while Lincoln was hated by most in the North until they began to die off so that the mythology of Lincoln began to grow.

The idea that the South held power and depended on slavery is false. America was beginning to move west and immigration from Europe was beginning to explode as millions of free whites moved west and the reason the conflict in the east seems to include the admission of new states in the west is because free whites did not want African slaves in the west taking their jobs and empowering the wealthy to take over all the land. they could care less about the slaves themselves and like in the North, it was jobs and employment that they wanted. In fact, agriculture from the west was already beginning to surpass the output of the South thanks to the railroads... the further west the railroads went, the more food came from the west. The North industrial base likewise was the reason that the vast majority of whites in the North opposed slavery as they feared that their greedy employers would use slave labor if they allowed slavery to return or to continue in the North. Many in the North far from caring about the slaves wanted to relocate them all to mexico or some other place to make America "Whites Only" and this was the beginning of segregation and white supremacy.

Another fact she revealed to me backed up by copies of newspaper articles was that almost all the immigration from Europe was coming to the North where the industrial jobs were. The scarcity of trained workers like blacksmiths in the South actually created opportunities for free blacks as most whites had little knowledge of many professions having been dirt farmers for most of their lives and the wealthy elite refused to do such work creating a niche that wasn't being filled by free whites.

She also corrected me on a few of my views as while there were thousands of free blacks in the South before the US Civil War, many of these were interracial. In fact, contrary to most beliefs, interracial relationships were actually common as were feelings by whites for their black / interracial relatives allowing them to win political elections or even to grow wealthy in their own right. However, if you went into almost any Southern city of any size or importance, you would find many free blacks who were not interracial who held many jobs whites wouldn't do or had no training for which these free blacks were well paid. You would even find free blacks lying on the street as drunks because they had their freedom but didn't possess the same skills as those who were successful so that they were totally dispossessed having no land to farm like dirt farmers, no skills which were in demand and it was these black Americans where the term "wetback" was first coined as all they were good for was backbreaking labor for which they were often not paid in cash but with a bottle of watered down hooch which only contributed to their sweating as their bodies sweated out the poisons they were putting into themselves when they found work.

I had thought, like most, that grant was an idiot sending soldiers and buffalo hunters west to wipe out the buffalo to starve out the Indians. Turns out I was wrong about that as they were being butchered for eastern industries which used everything from their hides to their bones for raw materials. Trainloads of hides, bones and even barrels of the animals blood were shipped east with some of the buffalo hunters actually growing rich from their efforts hiring others to work for them who had been unemployed so that they did all the work for pennies a day while those hiring them actually built cities and became wealthy businessmen. Grant, like Lincoln, was bought off by eastern corporations and the push west created new wealth and robber barons.

In regards to the immigration. It's not just the Irish who came as some estimate that entire nations in Europe became largely depopulated by immigrants moving to the United States. Norway sent up to a third of it's population to the US as one example and many places like Londons East End and White Chapel (made famous by Jack the Ripper) would be made known to Queen Victoria who to alleviate the extreme poverty of her nation began forcing entire neighborhoods to pick up and move to the US or Australia, if they were lucky since many places they were sent were worse, which is not the story we often hear and yet Susan did have articles to show how people in Britain at the time who were trying to help the poor were actually encouraging the impoverished to immigrate.

One could say that Lincoln should be credited with many great things as without Lincoln, most of what followed after the US Civil War wouldn't have happened. However, Susan pointed out to me that after Lincoln, the role of the American President, Congress and the Senate changed as widespread corruption escalated beyond all means of control and American elections increasingly became about image over substance which is why we revere men like Washington, Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt as they were Presidents more of the people while Lincoln established a new direction where our leaders would have substance in their personal lives but not in their leadership ability as Lincoln was a very accomplished man, a lawyers lawyer and he actually used his wealth to win the White House rather than having the support of the people as most Americans had no idea who their candidates were, what they believed or what if anything they had accomplished... they only knew their names and the lies these men often paid newspapers to publish.

Lincolns time as President is still affecting us to this day as we have the ability to learn our past, to learn the truth and to better choose our leaders based on our own education and intellect. Instead, we Americans with all our claims of greatness have less education than most living in Third World Nations. The reason American industry can so easily move out of the US and almost immediately begin making profit in foreign countries is that most American labor is uneducated or needs little or no education to perform their jobs. Most Americans cannot even do basic finances, have little or no education where their history is concerned and within three years of leaving school... have forgotten upwards of 75% of everything they learned over 12 years of basic education because of how poorly our public education system performs. In education, Susan showed me a few things where many of the "Progressive" ideals were actually attempted earlier in the 19th and early 20th centuries... and abandoned because they could not be made to work and our young people were graduating with an inferior education. It was through trial and error that a more Conservative education proved to provide the best education not because of the Conservative political ideology, but because they supported what worked and opposed radical changes which often led to failure. In that time period, public education was viewed as the most valuable commodity offered by America and millions of immigrants came here not for wealth or fame... but to guarantee their children an education. It would take decades of fighting over what our children were being taught until finally, a basic foundation came into being where America would lead the world in public education. But then came the radical 60's with the rebellion by America's youth against the establishment and American education began to slip even as American families now took it for granted and stopped being involved in their childrens education by the 80's not because they don't care as the left likes to tell us... but because they became dependent upon the government to provide for their childrens education and they placed absolute trust in teachers to educate their children thanks to the teachers unions efforts to put teachers on a pedestal. As Susan said, there's nothing wrong with respecting teachers but the unions did a great disservice in fighting to protect teachers so that today even those who praise our educators admit that as many as nine out of ten educators may be poor to completely ineffective in their roles as educators.

What most of us view about history we learn in school. Yet, what we learn in school about history is often no more than half truths, distortions and political propaganda because of government involvement. This is the major reason private and religious schools do so much better in the US as they eliminate government involvement and thus, government manipulations where our education is concerned. Religious schools reveal this where they teach religious faith within their school curriculum influencing what their students think and resulting both in religious faith... and a very intense hatred by those who were forced to endure religious dogma and who were punished for not learning or rejecting religious teachings. The same is true about history in public school which Susan points out how after 40 years as a public school educator, she found she could offer so much more as a librarian in relation to educating people because one reason she had so little interest in her job (causing poor performance) was because she knew she was teaching lies to her students and the reason her students were doing so poorly was because on some level... she was transmitting this to her students just as many of them reading books about history found that their school history books were filled with half truths and outright lies.

You cannot expect children to believe in you, believe in their country or have any faith when they are inundated by facts and truths our government still believes it can conceal in school history books... and the story about Abraham Lincoln is one of the greatest lies that the American people have ever been told. Lincoln was the absolute worst President that the United States has ever produced and the fact he's represented as our greatest President can only serve to cause children to lose faith in their history lessons when they learn he was one of the most incompetent leaders America has ever produced.

Even those who idealize Lincoln admit that he was a very poor President when forced to address the facts instead of the mythology about Lincoln and very few of them can even name anything he accomplished as President beyond freeing the slaves and winning the war... but when facing the truth, they admit he could care less about freeing the slaves, because he believed in states rights to determine that for themselves, and that his handling of the war actually contributed to it's length, the body count and the destruction which were all largely needless as had any other man been President, the US Civil War could have been prevented. Slavery would have eventually ended on it's own for the same reason it did in the North as free whites in the South would have wanted the jobs slavery deprived them of and which a better education would have revealed was depriving them of. Instead, white supremacy shifted to the South and a century of scapegoating the former slaves for everything that went wrong in their lives caused whites to remain in poverty too ignorant and ill educated to understand what was happening until desegregation and political correctness forced them to stop blaming black Americans and begin blaming their political leaders bringing about an economic miracle in the South within less than a decade.

 

[tooAlive]

I have family in Cuba.

And pretty much the general consensus among most people living there is the desire to get out. Saying that "some" Cubans risk their lives to reach the Florida Keys is a ridiculous understatement.

It doesn't seem to me like you've actually been to Cuba.

No, I have not. My nieces have and both give a different perspective on those they met then you state your relatives provided you. In any case, the sample size for both of our opinions is small.

In that case, I'd urge you to go.

And not just relax around the few tourist centers where regular Cubans can't afford to visit. You really start to get a perspective for the city once you go around, talk to the locals, and visit the places they normally go to.

Also, I'd recommend talking to as many locals as you can. Ask them what they have to do to put food on the table. And if you're feeling really adventurous, swing by one of the local hospitals and ask for a tour. I was floored when I got the chance to visit one with my grandfather last time I went 6 months ago.

Oh, and don't forget to take bottled water and toilet paper everywhere you go. You probably think I'm kidding but you'll know what I mean once you're there.

 

[rightwinger]

Lincoln sucks.

And a Communist too?

Bet he was into witchcraft as well!!!!!

No, He was a Vampire Hunter

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Why not move to Cuba or France if you want socialism?

Why destroy America???? We don't want your rat poison.

Why not move to Monaco if you want unfettered capitalism?

Go ahead, pack your bags and git the fuck out.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Why not move to Cuba or France if you want socialism?

Why destroy America???? We don't want your rat poison.

Thats easy....no conservatives to pay their way. They'd have to live like true socialist which means mud huts and no electricity.

 

[BreezeWood]

Lincoln, I thought ‘Dixie’ one of the best tunes I ever heard.

Lincoln loved Dixie ....

 

[Friends]

You've got to be kidding me.

The United States of America were responsible for the greatest period of growth and innovation the world has ever seen; all during a period of predominantly pure capitalism.

We often hear about the failure of socialism because it is a failure. And Fidel Castro is the least qualified to make that remark. It's laughable that you'd even quote him. If he knows how to execute socialism properly, why is Cuba a complete wasteland?

I do not care for the Cuban dictatorship, but I do not think it is any worse than a number of dictatorships the United States supported during the Cold War. In Cuba there is universal health care and free public education all the way to the doctorate level. The standard of living in Cuba compares favorably with the standard of living elsewhere in Latin America, and that is the relevant comparison.

The relevant comparison with the United States is the countries of Scandinavia. As I pointed in many respects those countries out perform the United States.

Really, so tell me Vern, why are cubans willing to risk their lives in the Florida straits by leaving the island on anything that floats?

.

Years ago I watched an American journalist ask Fidel Castro that question. He said that the percentage of Cubans who leave for the United States is lower than the percentage of Mexicans who migrate to the United States legally or illegally.

Now that I have answered your question, answer mine. Why isn't a large number of Scandinavians moving to the United States?

 

[BlindBoo]

Lincoln sucks.

And a Communist too?

Bet he was into witchcraft as well!!!!!

No, He was a Vampire Hunter

So it was his Wife that was the Witch. No wonder.

 

[Contumacious]

Years ago I watched an American journalist ask Fidel Castro that question. He said that the percentage of Cubans who leave for the United States is lower than the percentage of Mexicans who migrate to the United States legally or illegally.

And that is a fact because?!?!?!?

Now that I have answered your question, answer mine. Why isn't a large number of Scandinavians moving to the United States?

Sweden, Capitalism, and the Welfare State​

by Nima Sanandaji



Supporters of the welfare state around the world have for many decades pointed out the Scandinavian countries, particularly Sweden, as proofs of how this system can generate both wealth and social equality. Sweden is in fact one of the best examples of how economic freedom fosters development and individual responsibility, whereas big government destroys the foundation for economic growth and personal accountability.

"From the 1950s until the early 1970s, the Swedish social democratic model managed to successfully deliver on its promises of low unemployment, low inflation, and a relatively egalitarian distribution of wealth. But during the course of the past 25 years, the Swedish model has seemed to be headed along a path of slow disintegration, culminating in the disastrous economic recession of the early 1990s."

~ Jason Coronel. "Foundations, Decline and Future Prospects of the Swedish Welfare Model: From the 1950s to the 1990s and Beyond." DePaul University Spring 2002

During the 1870s Sweden was an impoverished nation, occasionally plagued by starvation. All this changed as capitalism was introduced in the country. Free markets, property rights and the rule of law created an environment where the Swedish people could achieve a long period of rapid economic development. Between 1870 and 1970 Sweden had the second highest economic growth in the world, second only to Japan.

Socialism had played an important role in Swedish politics, where the social democrats and the labour unions had become the most important political force. But Swedish social democrats were pragmatic and had during the first half of the twentieth century maintained an economy that was one of the freest in the world. The fact that Sweden did not take part in the world wars meant that our economy had a better chance to develop than those of many other western nations. The Swedish people also had a very strong work ethic. Also, Sweden’s Lutheran religion encouraged industriousness and good work ethics.

.

 

[tooAlive]

Years ago I watched an American journalist ask Fidel Castro that question. He said that the percentage of Cubans who leave for the United States is lower than the percentage of Mexicans who migrate to the United States legally or illegally.

And that is a fact because?!?!?!?

 

[regent]

On these boards it seems assumed that a country is either socialistic or capitalistic but that may not be true. Most modern nations are a mixture of socialism and capitalism. The amount of each varies with the individual country. Can anyone name a country that is pure socialism or pure capitalism today? The word socialism is almost a total political scare-word as used today and it is used to frighten. So can anyone name a total capitalistic or total socialistic country? There just might be one?

 

[g5000]

I know the answer to this but gotta ask anyway ... Can anyone give even one example of Obama's so-called "socialism".

Wow. You make it too easy. Just one?

Obama has taken away our choices on how we will consume health care. And he has more firmly entrenched socialistic programs related to health care which should be eliminated, not fed and watered and nurtured.

There are several examples of our freedom of choice having been taken away by Obama, and still others he is attempting to take away.

I cannot believe you support someone like Obama who is advancing the cause of socialism and are completely unaware of what you are supporting!

I guess I should be surprised you are so stupid, but I somehow am not. But it does make me wonder what you think you ARE supporting.



.

 

[Contumacious]

Really, so tell me Vern, why are cubans willing to risk their lives in the Florida straits by leaving the island on anything that floats?

.[/QUOT
Some Cubans, not the majority. And, what do you know about those who do?

I have family in Cuba.

And pretty much the general consensus among most people living there is the desire to get out. Saying that "some" Cubans risk their lives to reach the Florida Keys is a ridiculous understatement.

It doesn't seem to me like you've actually been to Cuba.

No, I have never lived there.

I did live in Miamah for about 15 years and that's my general impression.

.

 

[regent]

I know the answer to this but gotta ask anyway ... Can anyone give even one example of Obama's so-called "socialism".

Wow. You make it too easy. Just one?

Obama has taken away our choices on how we will consume health care. And he has more firmly entrenched socialistic programs related to health care which should be eliminated, not fed and watered and nurtured.

There are several examples of our freedom of choice having been taken away by Obama, and still others he is attempting to take away.

I cannot believe you support someone like Obama who is advancing the cause of socialism and are completely unaware of what you are supporting!

I guess I should be surprised you are so stupid, but I somehow am not. But it does make me wonder what you think you ARE supporting.



.

Is freedom of choice taken away by the government, socialism?

 

[g5000]

Is freedom of choice taken away by the government, socialism?

The so-called economic freedom which the planners promise us means precisely that we are to be relieved of the necessity of solving our own economic problems and that the bitter choices which this often involves are to be made for us. Since under modern conditions we are for almost everything dependent on means which our fellow-men provide, economic planning would involve direction of almost the whole of our life. There is hardly an aspect of it, from our primary needs to our relations with our family and friends, from the nature of our work to the use of our leisure, over which the planner would not exercise his "conscious control.”

The power of the planner over our private lives would be hardly less effective if the consumer were nominally free to spend his income as he pleased, for the authority would control production.

Our freedom of choice in a competitive society rests on the fact that, if one person refuses to satisfy our wishes, we can turn to another. But if we face a monopolist we are at his mercy. And an authority directing the whole economic system would be the most powerful monopolist imaginable.

The Road to Serfdom by Friederich Hayek



.

 

[g5000]

I have family in Cuba.

And pretty much the general consensus among most people living there is the desire to get out. Saying that "some" Cubans risk their lives to reach the Florida Keys is a ridiculous understatement.

It doesn't seem to me like you've actually been to Cuba.

I was stationed in Cuba and we regularly saw people trying to reach our base in Gitmo. Some made it, some blew up in the largest active minefield in the world.

So many were escaping that Castro begin building a fence inside the fence. During its construction, one of the soldiers made a break for our side. The others grabbed their weapons from the truck and opened up on him. Killed him on the spot.

All in sight of a young Marine I spoke to afterwards who had been just a kid in high school a few short months previously. There was nothing he could do. Rules of engagement. The lad's whole world outlook hardened in just those few seconds.

Cuba is not a worker's paradise.

.